The Buzz from the Bizz - Farringdon Village News

Not satisfied with one Consultation meeting, The Massey's Folly Preservation Trust were in the Village Hall again on the 16th May for a second meeting to keep the Village informed on what the Trust is aiming to achieve over the coming months and details of progress so far.

Settling in

Once again, Gillian McCallum, ( pictured left in discussion with members of the audience ) John Pickering and Geoff Cumber from the Preservation Trust with Jeremy Poll and Richard Codd from the Radley House Partnership, Appointed Architects for the MFPT. were on hand to give details of progress so far and sound out opinions from the audience.

Plans for the Folly

As always Vecta Mitchell was not afraid to air an opinion and she is seen here talking to Julia and John Pickering prior to the start of the meeting

Waiting for the off

Peggy Bavage, (right)who has been involved with the running of the Village Hall for more years than most was also on hand to keep an eye on the proceedings

The Audience were taking their seats under the wasteful eye of Richard Codd from Radley House.. . .
'

.Anne Charrington and Keith Haskell were about to join them in time for Gillian McCallum to welcome the audience and to introduce Richard Codd who, for the benefit of those not present at last months meeting and to bring those that were up to date, ran through the main points of the provisional plans for the redevelopment of Massey's Folly

The current plans were based on the information provided by those who responded to the survey circulated around Farringdon and neighbouring parishes earlier in the year, both surveys provided the basis for a lively discussion later in the meeting. Richard emphasised that these plans were still open to revision and modification before they are submitted to the various funding bodies for approval in the not to far distant future.

Included in the current plans were provision for the Nursery School, which as a long term user would be a valuable source of income for the the future viability of the project. Also included were improvements to the existing vehicle entrance off Church Road with the possible opening of another entrance at the eastern end of the Folly. This would give slightly improved sight lines for vehicles emerging onto the wider section of Church Road. The increase in traffic movements, if the MFPT plans are carried through, was a a matter of concern to many in the audience, with householders living in proximity to the Folly already expressing concern at the antics of a minority of the drivers dropping children off at the Nursery School.

Various options to alleviate the inevitable increase in traffic which would result were mentioned, including speed humps, one way systems and a reduced speed limit but all these options create further problems of their own in the proximity of the Folly or would increase vehicle numbers in the Street, where negotiation of parked cars has already become something of and art for road users.

The alterations in the stairwell, including provision of a lift and new stairs to give access to the upper levels are almost certain to be included in the final plan, as is the removal of the stage to create an improved entrance to the Village Hall from the car park to the west of the double doors that provide the current access. The budding thespians of Farringdon need not be too concerned, the suggestion is that the new building will incorporate facilities for the erection of a temporary stage which can be quickly assembled when required but could be removed and stored to leave more space within the Hall for other users.

Access and refurbishment of the upper levels would also increase the revenue options with several options available, the final plan will depend on which of the options on offer stand up to scrutiny when the final business plan is drawn up for the funding bid.

Environmental considerations are an important part of any submission to the lottery heritage fund and also have a beneficial effect on the heating bills, and with energy costs likely to increase still further in the future this is an important consideration for a building the size of the Folly. Despite its listed status the building that Farringdon inherited from the Rev.Thomas Massey's architectural eccentricities does provide the option to install solar panels in the convoluted roof layout, an opportunity unavailable to more conventional listed buildings. The panels could also be augmented by a heat pump which would operate on what is essentially a reverse refrigerator system, extracting heat energy from the open area at the rear of the Folly to supplement the efforts of the conventional but more efficient heating system that would replace the present boiler.

Geoff Cumber, Project Officer for the MFPT, then took centre stage and began with a short introduction on the reason for the foundation of the Trust, which was set up with the aim of purchasing all of Massey's Folly both the privately owned western section, where the First Friends Nursery now operates and the Village Hall, in order to obtain grants for the refurbishment and development of the Folly as a social amenity, including a Village Hall the continuation of the Nursery School and other facilities that could be available if the aims of the Trust can be achieved.

Single ownership was an essential requirement before any application for grants to repair and refurbish the Folly could be achieved. The Village Hall Management Committee, in its present form, could not obtain such funding as it only held part of the building and its sphere of operation in day to day management of the the Village Hall would prohibit access to the necessary funding required to repair and refurbish the Folly.

Geoff also outlined the various possible sources of funding with the National Heritage Lottery Fund heading the list. If the MFTP can submit a business plan that meets their strict criteria of the fund and in addition, convince the awards panel that Trust plans for refurbishment and the facilities they have included meet the requirements of Hall users in Farringdon and the surrounding area, there is the potential to source 75% of the acquisition and renovation costs from the Heritage Lottery Fund.

A further 25% could be provided by the Architectural Heritage Fund which according to my maths should be all that is required. In reality there is likely to be a shortfall of funding if the MFPT were to rely solely on these two major providers and the Trust will be investigating all possible sources to ensure that a sound financial base is established before the project proceeds into the construction phase. In a list of available resources Geoff included, The Ellis Campbell Foundation, Lord Barnaby's Fund, The Biffa Landfill Scheme, District and County Council funding scheme and regional funding sources.

English Heritage offer no direct funding for the Restoration work but are providing funding for operational costs. These include the Project Officers Salary and various other payments to cover approved expenses incurred by the MFPT in its day to day operations.

The Massey's Folly Preservation Trust is in negotiation with the the intention of purchasing the western part of the Folly at present in the ownership of the Andrae Trust. This is obviously a complicated process and certain details must remain confidential at present.

Geoff also gave a brief outline of the provisional timetable for the future, with the provision that with such a complex project involving so many organisations there my be delays and unforeseen hitches in the application process.

It is hoped to complete the Business and associated plans required for the National Heritage Lottery Fund application by the end of September this year. The Architectural Heritage Grant application is hoped to be completed by the end of November with the aim, if the applications are successful of completing the purchase of the western end of the Folly sometime next year.

Geoff also gave a brief outline of the timetable for various stages in the renovation process from planning applications to inviting tenders and various steps in the reconstruction process, all of which will take some time to complete but the target is to complete the project in the latter end of 2011

A question from the audience provoked a prolonged discussion with the viability of the MFPT project and the lack of a detailed business plan the main concern of many of the audience. This concern was acknowledged by the Trust representatives who were at pains to point out that to comply with the requirements of the funding bodies, consultation and assessment processes had to be undertaken hence the Survey, (of which more later) and the current programme of public meetings. The business plan could only be completed when it was decided which facilities should be incorporated into the refurbished building and was also dependent on the results of the whole building survey which would enable detailed repair costs to be estimated.

It would appear, as a result of the discussion, that the project viability would be largely dependent on the funding being in the form of grants. There was general agreement that it would be very difficult for the MFPT to finance the repayment of a loan for the purchase of the building even at a favourable rate of interest.

The viability of some of the facilities shown on the provisional plan was questioned, although the Trust were at pains to point out that these were provisional plans, all the facilities included were those that had been proposed by replies to the recent Survey and other consultations and they would welcome comment and opinions from any interested parties to help in the decision making process before the final draft was produced for the various grant applications.

Discussion then shifted to the Village Hall, as it is obvious that the MFPT must own the entire building if their plans to restore the Folly are to be achieved. The aims of the MFPT are to restore the building with the inclusion of various facilities, including a Village Hall.

This prompted a prolonged discussion which inevitable shifted to the two surveys which were circulated around the Village recently. Both the Massey's Folly Trust and Village Hall Committee surveys came in for some considerable criticism.

The number of MFPT surveys returned were disappointing and the number of VHMC forms returned was much higher but as with all statistics there are other factors that have to be taken into consideration.

More than one member of the audience made the point that they failed to complete the MFPT survey because it was so complicated

The MFPT made every effort to ensure their survey met the all requirements the funding bodies might require to meet the application criteria. Unfortunately the result was a intimidating document which required considerably more effort to complete than the box ticking survey circulated by the Village Hall Management Committee which by a remarkable coincidence was circulated just a few days before the MFPT survey. Each of the MFPT surveys that were returned represented the views of one household validated by the address on the form although the requirement for personal details, admitted necessary to validate the returns to meet the requirements of the potential finance sources

The VHMC survey was simplicity itself, so simple in fact that the options of anyone returning the form were somewhat restricted and several audience members felt the survey failed to ask the questions they wanted to answer. Be that as it may the results appear to show that among the individuals who completed the survey there is support for a new Village Hall to be on some unspecified site within the Parish and slightly less support for the retention of the Village Hall in the Folly.

These are of course individual returns as more than one form per household was delivered and whether or not that affects the validity of the results I will leave to those skilled in statistical analysis that prop up the bars of the Pheasant and the Rose and Crown.

Whatever the final outcome it does appear that the present relationship between the Massey's Folly Presentation Trust and the Village Hall Management Committee is not to the benefit of either organisation or the future provision of a Village Hall for Farringdon.

Apparently a Steering Committee has been set up to liaise between the two organisations but one wonders why yet another committee is justified , when both the Trust and the Committee are based in a small village, with most of the participants almost within a few hundred yards of each other. Surely it can't be too difficult for the various parties to actually meet together to establish some common ground.